Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
I thought those green bars signified how high you get.
Think Mitt Romney Will Say ANYTHING For Votes?
- Thread starter Krayven Sumhead
- Start date
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
take the fist out of your ass and refer to post #19.
nontheist
Well-Known Member
I think he is bragging how he has 24k in troll post in 2 years time. Must be awesome to mooch off in-laws and not have a worry in the world.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Not likely, the way he has cut military spending and opposed OIF all along, now with A-Stan drawing to a close, it will be very obvious if he preps the military for something like that. Rmoney has stated his plans to drastically increase military spending of he wins. Obama won't get us stuck in a quagmire, at most it will be like Operation Desert Fox or maybe even something like Clinton's Balkan war, but no grand GOPesque campaigns.
nontheist
Well-Known Member
That's a pretty bold statement being he already said he would strike Iran before they gain nuclear capabilities are you calling him a liar?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
you have nearly 1k posts in 3 months, you're on pace to have 8k posts in the time i made 24k. and yet you claim to work 112 hour work weeks
remember when i asked you to find where i mooched and the best you found was a post about me helping my wife with her insurance?
nontheist
Well-Known Member
Grow up bucky and ad the the conversation and quit trolling. Bragging about being a drug dealer isn't proving anything, while I indulge in MJ I don't participate in activities that give it a bad name and I condemn people that do. People like you are the reason it is illegal to begin with.you have nearly 1k posts in 3 months, you're on pace to have 8k posts in the time i made 24k. and yet you claim to work 112 hour work weeks
remember when i asked you to find where i mooched and the best you found was a post about me helping my wife with her insurance?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
lern 2 word, moron.
chusett
Well-Known Member
What activities give MJ a bad name? So when you started smoking MJ.. you were already a grower? Grew it yourself?
IF so.. horay for u. Not everyone else is lucky like you. Drug dealers are cool with me LOL. Now if you're a drug dealer that murders for fun, rapes people, or brainwashes and manipulates little kids and turn them to stoolboys thats a different story.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
no, I'm calling you an idiot
Not only do you have trouble spelling the word grease, you equate the word strike with occupation, quagmire, decade of war with no end in sight, draining the economy by sending money overseas, and you're a sock puppet.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
In the information age, it is quite a soap box, arguing with an idiot.
You know prices can't stay the same forever right?24 Fees Mitt Romney Tried To Raise In Massachusetts
Mitt Romney often hits President Obama for calling for tax increases on the wealthiest Americans. But a Democratic source forwards to this rather lengthy list of fees Romney raised in Massachusetts. He was struggling to close a budget gap without raising taxes; but many of which citizens of the state saw them hidden tax increases nonetheless. posted Jun 20, 2012 12:30am EDT
Andrew Kaczynski BuzzFeed Staff
Share
26
Romney increased the fee to renew a funeral directors license from $56 To $84.
Krayven Sumhead
Well-Known Member
Mitt Romney made some news when he appeared on Meet the Press yesterday and said he intended to reform the health-care system to allow people with preexisting conditions to obtain health insurance:
In other words, it’s not true. Romney doesn’t have a plan, or even a vague outline of a plan, to cover people with preexisting conditions. To preempt a conservative freak-out, Romney’s campaign clarified to National Review that its actual position remains, “Governor Romney will ensure that discrimination against individuals with pre-existing conditions who maintain continuous coverage is prohibited.”
The key clause here is “who maintain continuous coverage.” Romney is saying that if you have health insurance, you won’t get kicked off health insurance if you develop a serious condition, even if you switch insurers. That’s not the same as finding a way to give coverage to people who are locked out of the insurance market for medical reasons. It’s not even a new proposal. That right has existed in federal law since 1996. It’s possible Romney is saying he wants to strengthen it but, as Jonathan Cohn has explained, that’s really hard to do, and even if he could, it would be a very limited change that would affect very few people.
In any case, trying to analyze Romney’s comments about preexisting conditions as though they’re a genuine policy goal misses the point. It’s a campaign ploy. Romney is committed to fully repealing Obamacare. But since Obamacare contains a lot of popular provisions — indeed, most of them are popular — that puts Romney in the position of wanting to let insurers exclude people who are sick and do all sorts of other nasty things he’d rather not have to defend. His solution is to come up with a line that sounds like a promise to protect people with preexisting conditions, but isn’t. Indeed, it sounds so much like a promise to protect people with preexisting conditions that Romney himself forgot to add the requisite wording that rendered the pledge meaningless.
I'm not getting rid of all of healthcare reform. Of course there are a number of things that I like in healthcare reform that I'm going to put in place. One is to make sure that those with pre-existing conditions can get coverage.
This would be big news, if true. Finding a way for people with preexisting conditions to get coverage requires some pretty major reforms. Obama’s approach (which was also, of course, Mitt Romney’s approach in Massachusetts) was to ban insurance companies from discriminating against people with preexisting conditions, which in turn required an individual mandate to make sure people didn’t only start buying insurance when they were sick, which in turn required subsidies to people who couldn’t afford insurance. You could find another way to do it, like create special insurance pools for sick people, but that would require spending a lot of money (because sick people are expensive to insure), and Romney and Ryan’s budgets are premised on massive cuts to domestic spending.
In other words, it’s not true. Romney doesn’t have a plan, or even a vague outline of a plan, to cover people with preexisting conditions. To preempt a conservative freak-out, Romney’s campaign clarified to National Review that its actual position remains, “Governor Romney will ensure that discrimination against individuals with pre-existing conditions who maintain continuous coverage is prohibited.”
The key clause here is “who maintain continuous coverage.” Romney is saying that if you have health insurance, you won’t get kicked off health insurance if you develop a serious condition, even if you switch insurers. That’s not the same as finding a way to give coverage to people who are locked out of the insurance market for medical reasons. It’s not even a new proposal. That right has existed in federal law since 1996. It’s possible Romney is saying he wants to strengthen it but, as Jonathan Cohn has explained, that’s really hard to do, and even if he could, it would be a very limited change that would affect very few people.
In any case, trying to analyze Romney’s comments about preexisting conditions as though they’re a genuine policy goal misses the point. It’s a campaign ploy. Romney is committed to fully repealing Obamacare. But since Obamacare contains a lot of popular provisions — indeed, most of them are popular — that puts Romney in the position of wanting to let insurers exclude people who are sick and do all sorts of other nasty things he’d rather not have to defend. His solution is to come up with a line that sounds like a promise to protect people with preexisting conditions, but isn’t. Indeed, it sounds so much like a promise to protect people with preexisting conditions that Romney himself forgot to add the requisite wording that rendered the pledge meaningless.
Walter9999
Well-Known Member
If Willard is what you get for 1 billion dollars, the republicans have got to be shitting themselves. What a catastrophe!
nontheist
Well-Known Member
So do you think we can fly drones in and bomb Iran and that's that? It will be act of war, we will spend huge amounts of money in Israel, we will be even further in obligation to their defense. You can sit around and make stupid hypothetical assumptions all day but history shows even a slightest military skirmish cost billions and lasts for decades. When we strike Iran it will get nasty and it will cost a ton of money but we really have no choice. The regime in power is too unstable to possess nuclear weapons, Obama has said it and so has Romney. So pointing out what one said and ignoring the other for saying the same exact thing is being a fucking hypocrite.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
"So do you think we can fly drones in and bomb Iran and that's that?"
Basically yeah. Why occupy with troops? There is no indication Obama would commit the resources toward a major campaign seeing as how HE CUT DEFENSE SPENDING.
Basically yeah. Why occupy with troops? There is no indication Obama would commit the resources toward a major campaign seeing as how HE CUT DEFENSE SPENDING.
nontheist
Well-Known Member
Holy shit whats the temperature on your planet? So you don't think Iran will fight back? Fucking classic.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
no, I don't think they will fight back